it under Christ an everlasting Sabbath to the Lord by mans cessation from his own works as God did from his Isa 58. ult Heb. 4. which Iewish observation of the seventh day as a Sabbath now who so attends to never so solemnly though once sanctified and commanded to be kept will have as much acceptation with God that is none at all as he that never so solemnly swears by the Name of God in such ceremonious wayes as the Jews did of old or goes beyond the bounds of bare asseveration with attestation which to do we not onley think as the Bish. sayes of us p. 22. but know to be an old Iudaick superfluity now circumcised and by Christ precisely cut off from the lips of Christians Besides how that third commandment can be so immediately and peculiarly made use of as by the Bish. and the Priests it is in proof of the morality of Oaths or in proof of the legitimacy of them upon any whether Moral Political or Ceremonial account either more than other places which more directly and expresly as Deut. 6. 13. by way of precept command to swear by God's Name as if that were the most capital and Cardinal Text we do not see save onely that the Priests have insinuated that notion of Moral into peoples minds concerning all those ten words wrote with God's finger meerly as a figure of what he writes by his Spirit in mens hearts 1 Cor. 3. as if those were onely Moral and all Moses Writings by Gods own appointment had nothing in them but Ceremoniality or Politycism beside them and as if there were no morality in all Moses Law but in them for it's clear to all but the blind and their blind leaders that there 's Morality elsewhere and Ceremonials and Politicals or Iudiclals commanded there as well as in other parts of Moses Law among vvhich ceremonials and politicals that of Oaths to end controversies while that Nature was standing as it was yet among the Iews that affected strife being a part however Christ came to fulfil the Law Moral yet he coming in the way of fulfilling that as the Bish. says to abrogate the Ceremonial yea and Politick laws too it must necessarily follow he hath abrogated all laws for swearing which the Bish. cannot deny to be pertaining whether peculiarly or no that 's nothing to true Christians to the Iewish Polity in Church and State And as for those words Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy God in vain they rather forbid all than command any swearing if the Bish. words be true as they are who sayes A true Christians Oath is needless his word being as firm as it p. 41. and an evil mans Oath worthy of no more credit than a Lyar p. 17. Since upon that account whoever swears by the Name of God swears in vain and to no purpose whether he be a true man or one deceitful his word amounting to as much as his Oath for frustra fit per plura quod potest sieri per pauciora And so whereas the Bish. says there is no danger of doing hurt to our own consciences any more in Oaths than in serious affirmations and negations We say there is if swearing needlesly by God's Name be as it is a taking Gods Name in vain fith the Lord will not hold him guiltless who taketh his Name in vain Moreover whether the Bish. who insists so much upon the morality of the command for swearing under the Law and so consequently for the perpetnity of it under the Gospel doth not in effect quit and desist from that kind of Plea for Iudicial Swearing of his own accord we appeal to discerning men whilst p. 23. he pleads the necessity of such solemn Swearing upon no other account than as in order to cure many Christians good Christians the whilst of ill diseases jealousies distrusts dissimulations frauds uncharitableness unsatisfactions insecurities for saith he quoting Grotius in his Margent Iudicial Swearing's necessary not absolutely and morally or preceptively as the Shool-men note well but by way of consequence and remedy as good new Laws are necessary for the curb or cure of new Evils in in Polities and Kingdoms Possibly as Christians truly such we should need no Swearings in publick or private but as men weak and unworthy we cannot 〈◊〉 without such Oaths to end controversies and to secure as much as man can do the exact proceedings of Justice seeing then he says Oaths stands non ex necessitate precepti but medii onely See whether the Bishop do not here with his own hands take that course of swearing off from the file of the Gospel which he could not do if it were a moral precept for than secundum se what is Moral being Evangelical it must abide unabolisht under the Gospel and put it upon the score of the Law onely which being added onely because of transgression must end in Christ and under the Gospel by whom the strife and all transgression is ended as is to be shewed more at large by and by So that whereas he says thus Swearing is a part of that Moral Law which Christ signally tells he came not nor ever intended to abolish but maintain he may as well say Christ came not nor ever intended by his coming to abolish strife and transgression which is the end of Oaths for if he came to finish transgression and make an end of sin among his people and to bring in everlasting righteousness then to end Oaths also among his disciples which stand for no other end then to end strife while and where it stands for Absente aliquo sine de jure cessat medium tendens ad istum sinem Finally in that he says Christ maintains Oaths so far as the love of God and our neighbour are great accomplishments of all Laws to both which religious swearing is most conform Herein he palpably contradicts not onely the Truth but himself also who says Swearing is to be no where but where strife is which is a work of the flesh inconsistent with true love to the neighbour and not most conform to it for love fulfills the Law works no ill to the neigbour ends all strife and so puts swearing the means to end strife out of place and date 4. The Bishops said Information according to the state of the Question ought to be of the legality of judicial swearing in the Church of Christ among true Christians and Christs Disciples truly so called who are not under the Law that came by Moses but under the grace and truth of the Gospel that came by Iesus Christ otherwise he reaches not at all ad rem substratam comes not close to the case in question between himself and the Quakers whom he would convince who grant the lawfulness of Oaths of old among the Iews What the Bishop says p. 21. he supposes is true enough viz. That it is so clear even to the sylliest and most scrupulous among the Quakers that they
concerning Gods People among the Gentiles as well as the Iews we find no such command to them not such example of the Primitive Christian Gentiles practicing such respect as the Bishop quarrels with the Quakers for want of mentioned in the Scripture we find Christ and his Apostles so far from exhorting others to respecting mans Person that they Practiced no such thing themselves yea the very Enemies of Christ confest thus of him Mat. 22. 16. We know that thou art true and Teachest the way of God in Truth neither carest thou for any man for thou regardest not the Persons of men the Apostle Iames also is so far from pleading as this Bishop doth against our Practice in this particular that he declares it as inconsistent de jure with the Faith of our Lord Iesus Christ to have respect to the Persons of men because of gold rings goodly apparrel and gay clothing riches high places and such other accomplishments when the Poor because of vile raiment are slighted and despised and that it is contrary to the Royal Law of the Scripture and that it is Commission of Sin and Transgression Iude also declares it to be the guise of the ungodly Scoffers and complainers of the last times that should walk after their own Lusts while their mouth speaketh great swelling words to have mens Persons in admiration because of advantage Jude 15 16. Moreover Christs Disciples were commanded by him in their Itinerary Ministry to the truth to salute no man by the way Luke 10. 4. So that here is instance enough of Gods People both among the Iewes and others as in the Case of Elihu refusing themselves and reproving in others the shewing of the said outward respect to Superiors whose Iust Power yet they obeyed and were subject to as Children to Parents hired Sorvanes to Masters in their business in which they were faithful or Subjects to Kings and Princes under whom they had Protection to whom they paid Tribute also to that end and purpose whom in so doing they honored See Rom. 13. 7. 1 Pet. 2. 13. to the 18. Eph. 6. 12. 1 Tim. 6. 1. 2. Howbeit they neither did nor durst adore their Persons according to all the frivolous fashions of their Countreys Herein therefore is the Bishop found speaking contrary to the Truth and 't is too bad for a Bishop to be found besides it when he sayes the Quakers denyal of Civil Respect is contrary to the Reverent and humble behaviour of all Gods People in all Agâ—…s Iewes and Gentiles then whom none were more full of outward 〈◊〉 according to the Custom of their Countreys Moreover we appeal to the Bishop himself whether iâ—… would nor have been grossly rediculous and absurd for Paul who was a good Gospel Minister in those dayes to have said with his Hat in his hand and his body bowing to the ground to Timothy or Tituâ—… who were Bishops as well worthy of Honour as any in these dayes May it please your Grace Right Reverent Father or if it like your honour my Lord. Obj. But the Bishop perhaps may tell us according to the usual strain when ever called to give any account of that excessive eminent Earthly Glory Reverence and Preferments which are their proper Honoraries in these times in compatison of what was either injoyed oâ—… expected by the pure Gospel Ministers of the Primitive Times that then the Church was as yet but in her Infancy Non-age Child-hood and weak Estate and had not yet obtained to that perfection of Glory strength of Beauty hight of Dignity c. as it hath since grown to and attained Answ. When we talk to have all things according to the Primitive Pattern indeed in matter of true Beauty Holiness Righteousness Innocency Patience Long-suffering Truth Humility Love and talk concerning growth in Grace to the measure of those first best and purest People of God in former times that were his blessed ones in whose hearts was no guile who were undefiled in the way and walkt in Gods Law and did no Iniquity as we read Psal. 119. 1 2 3. and concerning the perfection of Holiness so far as to dominion over Sin and living by the more inward Revelation of God's mind to men out of his own mouth then we are told that we must not presume to expect in these dayes such high attainments in the knowledge of Gods Mind and Will such immediate manifestations of it to us such a powerful presence of God amongst us such a full measure of his Spirit Powred out upon us such eminent gifts as the Corinthians and other Churches then had nor growth to such a measure of Grace Wisdom and Understanding such clear Illuminations and intimate Asquaintance with Gods Counsel and those internal Dictates of his Spirit so as to discern them from Delusions nor such perfect Ability to walk so exactly with God as they then did And why namely because the Church in the Apostles times was eminently shining forth in its prime lustre and full vigour perfect glory and beauty and the Saints then were Fathers strong Men and well grown Christians in comparison of whom those in afer Ages especially we of these latter Ages are but as Children Weaklings Infants that must suck what Knowledge and attainment in Christianity we have as it were from their Breasts so that in the Respects fore mentioned the Church with them which now is grown young again and back into its Childhood into a state and stature of Infancy was then as it were in a state of Man-hood But when we query and expostulate with that Clergy that is but falsly so called as in contradistinction to them they call the Laity concerning that Pomp and Lordliness they now appear in that high Preheminence honourable Titles of Popes Cardinals Arch-Bishops Arch-Deacons The Deans Worship my Lords Grace c. Superabundant Maintenance as innumerable as unprofitable Traditions as supersluous as superstitious Ceremonies Orders Offices and Officials Parsons Vicars Curats Chapters Prebends Canons Registers Apparitors Proctors Organists Singers Choristers and outward Observations concerning Meats Drinks Dayes Times Postures Gestures Hats Habits and other not more multitudinous than Immomentary Formallities in their Worships of meer legal Concernment and Consideration never known not heard of in the pure Dayes of the Apostles Then in order to our resolution in this we are by them given to unâ—…stand that which can never stand under the animadversion of an impartial observer of their Absurdities without a just censure of Confusion and Contradiction to themselves to this purpose viz. That in the Apostles times the Church was then but in her non â—…age weakness infancy immature unpollished condition and could not be seded in that compleatnesse as to all those outward decencies orders and accomplishments which now it hath That was but the day of the Christian Churches Nativity wherein her Navil was not cut neither was she washt in Water to supple her nor salted at all nor swadled at all
do not doubt of the lawfulness of swearing lawfully among the Jews not only as permitted but commanded but Quid hoc ad Rhombum we have this at least to say which all men have not against himself and alâ—… those that are impositive of Oaths upon them which himself says the primitive Christians and Disciples of had viz. Christiani sumus We are Christians to the silencing of them from exaction and himself without any more adoe from further troubling himself toward their conviction for the Question is not concerning the use legulity or necessity of Oaths to end strife among inâ—…urious contentious people that love and yet live in strife and other works of the flesh and so not under the teachings and power of that Gospel of the grace of God that leads out of strife and all other ungodliness and worldly lusts but under the power of that evil spirit in them that lusts to envy strife hatred variance deceit and every other evill and so under the law which hath dominion over a man so long as the old man with his deeds liveth in him and he lies yet in his trespasses and sins how far forth Iudicial swearing may be of a legal necessary use among evil unconscionable men that make no conscience of any thing swallow every thing and strein at nothing to tye them to speak the truth is not our business to contest with any about we are willing to let that alone to men nor need we dispute against the thing if we be against it since the Bishop to the confuting of himself who pleads for it says thus much against it to the invalidating his own plea for at least that asserted necessity of it viz. That no more credit can be given then to a Lyar to a Prophane purson that fears not God though he swear never so solemnly in judicial proceedings which if so then what use need or necessity there is of those mens Oaeths in judicial proceedings whose most solemn swearing even there is of no credit and nothing worth we see not nor any else whose eyes are open let the Bishop seem to himself to see what he pleases Yet for quietness sake to avoid all jangling about jurations so be they let us alone to live peaceably out of strife in truth it self and so beyond that so necessary medium as they count it of Oaths and from whom men need no more when we are called to give our witness then the very veracity of our bare words since Christiani sumus we can freely leave them to swear and exact and take Oaths as much as they will who can't believe one another out of a mutual jealousie that they are all lyars and yet can give credit one to another no more than to a lyar neither though swearing never so solemnly in Iudicial proceedings An Oath being as the Bish. urges out of Heb. 6. among not Saints not Christians but among men a means to end strife whether they judge one another worthy to be believ'd by each other when they swear yea or nay that 's little to us let those men who are in strife make use of Oaths to end them if they will or can we should be glad to see all men to agree and to live in peace as 't is our desire to do with all and in that love that works no ill to the Neighbour but believes all things and bears all things and so carries beyond Strife and Oaths also But if they cannot they may swear on for us in Courts and Iudicatures as they ought not to exact swearing of us so we should not were it in our power force them to a forbearance of it in Courts in order to end their strifes against their though yet clouded and erring Consciences Nay rather how best we own Oaths to be of no other than of a Iewish and Legal and not of any immediate Christian or Evangelical consideration yet as to the whole world which lyes in wickedness and stands though under some form or other of Religion still in strife under the dominion of sin and not of Grace as the Iews did they may stand if they will for us as they did under those legal institutions which were added because of their transgressions and in order to end their strifes for if the Law in any of the Ordinances of it be yet remaining in any force power or dominion it is among those that are not yet come out of sin and deceit to that everlasting righteousness and truth of the Gospel which Christ who puts an end to sin brings in among his Disciples who seek his Kingdom and the Righteousness of it but not among the Saints that obtain by participation of Christ's power Spirit and righteousness to a dominion over sin and so over the Law for where sin hath not dominion over men as it had before there men are no more under the law but under Grace Rom. 6. 14. such over whom the Law had dominion while they lived and were in the flesh and under the prevalent workings of the motions of sin in their members to bring forth the evil fruits of strife variance c. unto death and bondage are then delivered from the Law being deatd to that in which they were once held they bring forth fruits of the Spirit unto God love peace meckness without envy hatrâ—…d strife and serve in the â—…wness of the Spirit and not in that legal oldness of the Letter Rom. 7. wherein those walk who notwithstanding all their profession of Religion and Christianity in words yet bite and devour one another till at last they be consumed one of another with their lying deceit bitter envying and strife for all their Oaths yea Gal. 5. 18. 23. if men be led of the Spirit they are not under the law and those that bring forth the fruits of the Spirit against such there is no law So though the Law is good if men could tell how to use it lawfully yet we know as Paul did 1. Tim. 1. 8 9 10. that the law is not made for a righteous man but for the lawless and disobedient for the ungodly and for sinners for unholy and prophaue for murderers of fathers and mothers men-slayers whoremongers them that defile themselves for men-stealers for lyars for persured persons and any other thing that is contrary to the sound Doctrine of the glorious Gospel of the blessed God which is witnessed among the Quakers to be the power of God to the salvation of them from those unrighteousnesses for whom therefore neither the Law nor the curbs and cures provided in it as remedies against mens diseases 〈◊〉 justly applicable or to be imposed But now the Bish. beats all besides the Iron upon the Anvil disputes besides the Question and makes it his main drift to prove the necessary use of Oaths either among the Iews among whom the Quakers deny it not to have been lawful to which purpose he troubles himself to no purpose because without need
turned over to be destroyed as wilfully and obstinately rebellious against God The sum then of this Bishops Christian Charity and pious Pitty to the Quakers amounts to as much as If he should have said tolerate them yet a little that they may be taken away totally at the last In altum tollantur protempore tolerentur ut lapsâ—… craviore cadant But that which is more observable yet in the passage above spoken to is the Bishops contradiction herein to himself and to what he himself holds forth for truth in other passages for howbeit here he condemns and objects it against us as matter of obstinate offending if after some respite given as to execution of Penalties and rational Courses taken though succeslesly for our Information we be found though unconvinced not conforming cheerfully to what is imposed yet elsewhere as namely page 10 11. he commends and praises it as good in the Quakers in that they choose where they remain unconvinced rather to Suffer than Sin against their Consciences which to do he himself saith were to Sin against God whose holy Will saith he there Shining on the Soul in reason and religion either seeming or real is indeed the present rule of Conscience Nor may any Man saith he Act contrary to these dictates which he judges to be God's though he err as to the Truth of the Rule yet his Iudgement binds so far as it represents though in a false Glass the supposed Light of God's Will for he that will venture to Act against Conscience though Erroneous will also Act against it though it be never so cleer and perspicuous if Conscience Act according to its Error it Sins materially against the Truth of God if it act contrary to its appearing Principles it Sins formally and malitiously as wilfully rebelling against the supposed Will of God Mark well the Confusion of this Man we do not deny but that to his own great disadvantage aswell as the perpetual Shame of himself and all such of his Brethren as go about by outward Penalties to fright and force men to act against their Consciences in these last Words of his he utters a most undeniable Truth but how grievously he interfeers and thwarts himself and his own Sayings in the place above spoken to he that is not sâ—…ark blind cannot choose but see One while if the Quakers do not Cheerfully obey after the Bishops rational Applications to them for their Conviction which in reality rather are Irrational if they all have no more then Bishop Gauden hath yet said to say for Swearing the Laws of men imposing Oaths upon them against their Consciences they are to be Condemned and Punished as Evil Deers that sin wilfully and obstinately against God and so are under the rigid Inflictions and severe Penalties of mens Laws most iustly as wilfully rebellious against both and inexcusably before both God and man Otherwiles again to sin against their Consciences though 〈◊〉 is to be condemned as Evildoing is to sin against God yea to act contrary to its appearing Principles or against the holy Will of God no more then sâ—…ming â—…o shine on the Soul which saith he is indeed the present rule of Conscience though they Err as to the truth of the Rule and to act contrary to those dictates which though falsly they iudge to be Gods or contrary to what his Judgement represents though but in a false Glass the supposed Light of God's Will is that which nâ—… man 〈◊〉 do is to act contrary to what every man stands bound to and ought to act is a sign of an unconscionable Man or one that makes no Conscienie at all in things that are never so true plain cleere and prospicuous is a sign of one that hath not so much as integrity of Intention without which there is no mitigation of any Fault yea is to sin formally yea malitiously yea a wilful or obstinate rebelling against God which sort of sinning formally wickedly or wilfully by how much it is worse than to sin no more than materially as he speaks or weakly for want only of Knowledge of what is good by so much the greater say we is the Guilt and Punishment that is by right to be inflicted for the Sin as to take away a man's Life materially only unawares and with no ill mind is not so bad as to do it formally malitiously and wilfully against the known Will of God to the contrary and by so much the more are they Good Praise-worthy and Commendable saith the Bishop himself who will rather choose to Suffer than so to Sin upon which ground it is that the Bishop who condemns it as Evil with a witness and as Sin in the highest degree for any men to sin against their Consciences expresses himself in way of Praise and Commendation of the Quakers and in way of Friendship and high Approbation of this as a good thing in them in as much as they choose by their Profession thereof in those Papers given in one day to some of the Lords rather to Suffer than to Sin against their Consciences and so against God page 10. which choice of Suffering under the presecuting Hands of Men rather then to violate the Conscience before God if it be so highly to be commended â—…o good and praise worthy a matter as the Bishop truly enough owner it to be then how little they are to be commended who fâ—… fear of the Wrath of men choose to save themselves from it by Sinning against God and their own Consciences much more how greatly and justly they stand Condemned at the Tribunal of God himself who without any Iust Cause unless Innocency be a Cause ministred to them so to do by Threats and Penalties seek to cause honest men so to Sin we leave to the Bishop himself to judge who hath given his Consent to such Transactions Howbeit we desire him to judge it by the Light of God which in his own heart shewes which is Good and Commendable and which is Evil for want of attendance unto which he hath in the blinâ—…ness and darkness of his Understanding run himself hitherto into such a mist of Confusion and self Contradiction as not only to commend the Quakers as a generation of Iust Ones for choosing rather then to Sin against Conviction to undergo the Penalties which man's Law for God and Conscience sake inflicts upon them but also to commend these as a generation of Iust Ouer that do afflict them For so he doth page 19. whilst he commends those Penalties as just Penalties which for doing no other thing then what himself before commended in them aâ—…e by men's Laws insâ—…icted on them which two things to wit the Quakers choosing to suffer the Penalties inflicted on them for their Consciences and their Adversaries choosing to inflict Penalties on them for their Consciences that they should be both good both praise-worthy both commendable both justifiable and just in the sight of God is as impossible as 't is
however and whatever the Iews then thought of them that those irregular forms of Oaths as he terms them both were then saving the Iews conceit to the contrary as well as they are at this day unlawful Nor 4 hly is the question whether such Oaths by any Creature being once rashly taken be obliging to performance in a lawful matter or no For howbeit the Bishop says that all agree they bind that in this case Qâ—…od fieri non debuit factum valet and that like Bastards they should not have been begot but must be kept and thâ—…e the Iews though they ought not so to have sworn yet having so sworn were obliged thereby and were not excused from perjury in non-performance Which saying of the Bishop that all agree to this confutes that saying of the same Bishop wherein he confesses p. 29 30. quoting that of August in proof of it That all the Iews disagreed from this and fancied such Oaths were not binding uyon their souls either as to truth or right yet that is neither here nor there to the Question Nor is the Question as it lies in its full latitude between the Bishop and the Quakers to be coopâ—…d â—…p into this narrow Room as the Bishop sayes it will come into p. 24 25. viz. Whether those words of Christ and the Apostle Mat. â—… Iâ—… 5 dâ—… â—…terly fâ—…bid all Swearing in any case whatsoever to all Christians so that by the Law of Christ it is a sin to swear as in privates so in publike Transactions or Courts of Iudicature c. The Cishop states the question too straitly while he ties it up to the interpretation of those two Texts onely for though it must needs be granted that the whole stress of the Controversie stands so strictly upon the right or wrong understanding and rendition of those Scriptures that they are very well worthy to have the prehemininâ—…e as to the final determination of the point and we are willing to refer it wholly thither and to stand or fall in our Conflict by a candid sober clear Christian unprejudicate impartial Animadversion of those Texts with the several circumstances attending them and as they stand in relation to their Contexts and other Scriptures and very well we may seeing the Bishop himself gives ground to us so far as to confess p. 20. that we have of them two such notable Texts in our way which seeâ—… to stand as the Angel of the Lord against Balaam with a Sword in their hand to stop the way of any Swearing whatsoever All agreeing that the words are a Divine and strict prohibition against the sin of Swearing and therefore the fears and scruples of the Quakers in point of Swearing are not to be wholly despised but in all Charity the words ought to be cleared and their scruples removed yet whereas the Bishop sayes p. 25. that the Quakers do not argue any thing further by way of rational deduction moral grounds or Religious Principles either from the nature of an Oath or consent of other Scriptures or from the Divine Attributes or glory but barely insist upon the words and urge the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Letter as an absolute or universal Negative We do him to wit that as We own and know indeed the Words to be an absolute universal Negative without any limitation or dispensation so We are not under such an absolute limitation of our selves to the bare Letter of those two Texts but that if any thing of a rational Consideration be offered whereby to divert us from ouâ—… sense of them or ouâ—… judgement in that case of Swearing We are ready to receive it or to return our reasons why We cannot And as our Books already extant are not without much of rational deduction both from those Texts and other Topicks so We may find somewhat more to offer than our sense on those two Scriptures And thereupon We propound the Qâ—…stion somewhat larger than it stands stated in the Bishop's Book that he may have the more Field-room against us it he can find ought of solid Reason wherewith to fight us 6. The question then iâ—… the other as he states it not excluded but included Whether it be lawful for Christians to impose Swearing under penalties oâ—… to swear either by God himself or any Creature in any case whatsoever in private or in publike Transactions or any Courts of Iudicature be the matter of the Oath ever so just and true and the manner or form of it as ordained by man ever so solemn and the Authority Humane requiring them ever so lawful in civil respects any thing in those two Texts or any thing any otherwise whatsoever to the contrary notwithstanding This the Bishop affirms on behalf of his own Conscience and the consentient sense of this Church and Kingdom yea of all Christian and Reformed Churches of any renown that the use of Swearing in Iudicial Proceedings is lawful for Christians and that Christs words are to be understood with such a limited sense and strict interpretation as not to forbid the use of Swearing in a Religious and lawful way On the other side professing that we are led thereto no otherwise then by the Conscience of that obedience we owe to Christ We have denied that either imposing Oaths under penalties or that Swearing even in Iudicialâ—… Proceedings iâ—… lawful for Christ's Disciples and that absolutely and universally Christs Will is declared to the contrary to all his Disciples in those two Scriptures This being the question the negative part of which is held by the Quakers it was the Ministerial duty of the Bishops who are sound in the affirmative very suitable to their Profession and Paternal Compassion by Bish. Gaudens own confession p. 2 3. in his motion to the House â—…or some respite till it were discharged in order to the Quakers Information and such sufficient Instruction as might answer their Arguments remove their difficulties 〈◊〉 their Câ—…sciences and either bring them into a chearful obedience in that particular or else leave them without excuse before God and man so as to justifie the truth of the Law against the Quaker Error and render them justly suffering the severity of it for obstinate offending We say it was the Bishops duty in prosecution of the eâ—…s aforesaid either per se or per alios before their assenting to the Edition of the Law against us at least of B. Gauden himself whose own motion and confession that was to have discharged it in every one of these subsequent particulars 1. He ought to have perform'd that business of instruction in order to the Quakers Information concerning the lawfulness of imposing under penalty as well as of taking Oaths in Courts of Iudicature 2. Of both these in such wise and manner cases and places as they are at this day in England impos'd and taken 3. Now in the dayes of the Gospel since the ending or fulfilling of the Law in Christ. 4. Among true Saints
Christians Christs own Disciples or in his true Church 5. By way of proof and not by meer affirmation onely or bare position 6. This proof not by way of meer probable Argumentation only but by way of plain Scriptural evidence and Scientifical demonstration that is able to give an infallible eviction 7. This Scriptural demonstration from the Scriptures of the New Testament not of the old onely 8. Any thing in any Books put out out by the Quakers or in those two Texts Matth. 5 Iam. 5. to the contrary notwithstanding 9. Such as must succeed so as effectually to produce its immediate end viz removing all difficulties such clear conviction and infallible satisfaction to their Consciences as actually leaves them without any doubt cloud or exception in themselves against the truth of the thing imposed and to be practised 10. Or else in case of non-conviction or of non-submission against conviction after the Bishop's so full and effectual endeavoâ—… of their information denominate them undoubtedly such wilful resisters and obstinate offenders against the Law as fall and that so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the severe penalties thereof as to he left in their sufferings without Plea for themselves and without any just Excuse before God and Man These being the particulars of the Bishop's professed Work it remains now that we onely take some account of the residue of his Book how accordingly he hath accomplish'd it which if it appear to right reason that he hath God forbid that we should wilfully deprive our selves of that Religious Liberty is left us and obstinately refuse that which is not onely lawful for Christians to use but as the case stands prudentially necessary 〈◊〉 the expediencâ—… of our Lives outward Liberties Estates gond 〈◊〉 and enjoyments but if otherwise it be so that our Bow like Ioseph's at least abides in the same strength it did before however the Arch-Archers of all have shot sorely at us to the wounding of our reputation among such as are apt to be more â—…way'd by the Bishop's proofless positions than by the Quakers evident demonstrations and that our Testimony heretofore given stands extant in the forâ—…â—…d â—…d vigour as before then what ever others do and what ever the contray cost us God forbid that we should turn aside from following the Lord so as to lead Truth and Reason captive after mens 〈◊〉 conjectures and conceits and not suffer violence quietly without violent resistance under the Laws of men rather than do that which the Bishop sayes p. 10 11. no man may do i. e. act contrary to those dictates we judge or but suppose to be Gods and sin formally and maliciously against but appearing principles of Truth and so wilfully rebel against the Truth or but supposed Will of God whose â—…ly Will shining on the soul in Reason or Religion seeming or real is indeed the present Rule of Conscience which binds so far aâ—… it represents though in a false glass and though it err as to the truth of the Rule and so violate both our own Consciences and his Commands to whom we Christians owe the highest love Loyalty and obedience First then as to the lawfulness of imposition of publike Oaths under penalties in Iudicial Proceedings he professes it's fit p. 2. we should be informed thereof before we suffer as offenders by the Law of God as well as Man But we profess we cannot find throughout his Book any proof at all for imposing Oaths under penalties unless he should count upon his instancing in Abraham Iacob Ioshua David and others requiring or desiring an Oath of 〈◊〉 they entrusted but not under penalties which is not demonstrative neither being drawn but ab exemplo from the example of 〈◊〉 and that under the Law too whose practice in many things or indeed in any thing though they were good men is not our Rule but God's own Precept under the Gospel whose permission of sundry things then is no commissionâ—…or â—…or the doing of the same things now whereupon if there were any ground from which to prove it lawful for Christians now to swear in some cases with a good Conscience that 's far from justifying it as lawful in Christians by penalties to force other Christians to swear against their Consciences in Courts of Iudicature so that therein he hath done his work but by the halves 2. As for that kind form or manner of poenal imposing and taking Oaths in such cases and places as 't is now used in and so strictly pleaded for by our English Professors there 's not one inch oâ—… evidence about the warrantableness of that although it 's not onely possible but exceeding probable that thousands of people if they were well satisfied as to the thing in some form or other of it which the Powers Priests and People of this Nation call Swearing though the Qu. do not so call it who can never with good Conscience to God conform to those many cumbersom customary superflâ—…ous fidling formalities of handling fingering kissing of a Book with so help me God and the Contents of this Book and suck like by which meer ceremonious accidental odd petty practises postures and gestures as by the substantial and essential form thereof they at least must be supposed to define an Oath who confine men so to them as that they will punish them as not swearing to their satisfaction though offering that which is ten times more Evangelical and Substantial as I call God to record upon my soul or I speak as in the presence or in the sight of God or I speak truth before God and lye not my Conscience bearing me witness dâ—… in the sight of God or God is my Witness or some such solemn form of Words as may be suggested to the person at the time of his Attestation unless the other adventitious inventious forms aforesaid of touching or talking by road after some Clark or Cryer be conform'd to yea which makes the matter the more either renownedly or ridiculously remarkable on the part of those Rabbies by whose Opinions some subordinate Rulers are in this point irregularly ruled though they almost in all their Booâ—… tell us that an Oath is no more than a calling God to witness as a special honor or appeal to him yet if we who do not count it swearing by God to call God to witness any more than it is swearing by a man to call a man to witness unless there be such a form of speech us'd as to say By God and then that 's an Oath whether by God by man or by any other creature as by Heaven by Earth c. if we say God is my Witness I speak before God I appeal to God I call God to record or such like not stinting nor limiting our selves syllabically to those very monosyllables onely of Yea Yea Nay Nay which words the Bishop sayes p. 31. but on his own head or by hear say onely for it 's not so the Quakers so much affect to use
under it as well as throw it of the Gospel condemn'd not the Jews for swearing simply but for swearing vainly and for for swearing yet by his Son who was made under the Law and a minister to reform it for a time and after a time put an end to it and to the transgression and sin variance strife c. because of which it was added by bringing in the everlasting righteousnes he condemns somewhat more thâ—…n was condemned by Moses and the Prophets who yet by the Bishops own confession have condemnd both vain swearing and forswearing therefore that could be no other then the very thing call'd swearing it self even by Gods own Name as well as by any creature altogether as is seen hereafter But if the Bishop say he uses those Old-Testament Texts and examples as Mediums onely and premises by which ultimately to prove the lawfulness of swearing under the Gospel as one of the moral and so perpetual precepts of the Law which end not in Christ nor are abolished but established by his coming for thus indeed that we may do him no wrong â—…ut right to the utmost so far as 〈◊〉 words can help themselves he comes to speak in the passage following p. 37 38. Bp. If from all these premises it be clear that some swearing 〈◊〉 morally lawful agreeable to the express Law of God even in the third Commandment in which we are not onely forbidden to prophaâ—… the Name of God but the affirmative also is included of sanctisying his Name by all ways of praying praising vowing and swearing if in doing thus upon just occasion private or publike we sin not against any Moral Law c. it must underâ—…ably follow that Christ did not forbid or annul the old Law as to the sanctity and morality of an Oath but onely take away the corruption and abuse it being no desigh of Christ to destroy or diminish but to fulfil the Law Moral However he came in the way of fulfilling to abrogate the Ceremonial yea and the Politick Laws too so far as they were peculiar to the Jewish Policy in Church and State c. Swearing was a part of that Moral Law which Christ signally tells shem he did not come nor ever intended to abolish but to maintain so far as the love of God and our neighbour are great accomplishments of all Laws to both which Religious Swearing is most conform it being to God's glory and our Neighboâ—…s good There is no danger then of doing hurt to our own Consciences any more than in serioâ—…s Affirmation and Negatiâ—…us 〈◊〉 Oath having nothing but the attestation of God in it who is â—…iness â—…f all we say and do Ans Of what the Bish. speaks this iâ—… the sum the 〈◊〉 for Swearing was Moral as those for praying praising these standing under the Gospel in force as well as under the Law To which we return Let the Bish. take away the shadow and plead nothing but the substance of things and leave nothing but the morality of the whole Law and we will grant him that it may and must be used at this day But that 〈◊〉 not done in all things if it be in anything by the Popish nor yet by the Protestant Bishops to this very day The Law which had the shadow of the good things to come but not the very Image or substance it self that came by Moses but the 〈◊〉 things themselves 〈◊〉 the Grace and the Truth is that which 〈◊〉 Gospel hath and that came by Iesus Christ. Moses and the 〈◊〉 prescribed and enjoined the ceremony of all service to God and the figures of the true but as the day breaks the shadow vanishes the figures flee away and the maked truth it self of them stands only de juâ—…e under Christ now How beit I undervalue not the Law so as to liken it thereto as being in worth infinitely above them yet as all Aesops Fables which vvere but fancies had some moral or other after them the shevving of vvhich they pointed at so much more had all Moses his outward forms and figures some moral substantial more Evangelical spiritual and eternal Truth and true things which they vvere but the shadows shews and figures of and as the ceremoniality of the service of praying and praising was the offering of Incense and Sacrifice singing c. and other formal supersluities which then attended those services but the substance it self is the lifting up of the heart to the Lord in sighs and groans from the movings of his own pure Spirit and singing and making melody in the heart to the Lord under the Gospel in which time the offering up of sweep incense and other Sacrifices would be but the offering of Swines blood And the substance of circumcision is that of the heart Rom. 2. which being come by in Christ the other is but the concision Phil. â—… And Christ the Passeover in the substance in respect of whom the other killing of a Lamb once in force is but the cutting off a Dogs neck So the substance of that ceremouy of Swearing that now abides as the Bish. himself confesses is no other than what we are free to viz. the testifying the known truth from the heart with an addition of no more then as occasion may require it some kind of attcstation of God who is Witness of all we say or do and that no more than confession or denial by yea and nay with onely some attestation or calling â—…o witness to strengthen the asseveration which is no Oath as is shewed above is that stauding substance that answers to that shadowy ceremonious way of Swearing in use under the law is most evident by the Paul's rendering of that term Swearing as it 's spoken of in way of prophesie concerning its continuance then as Isa. 45. 23. To me every tongue shall swear under that term of confessing onely under the Gospel Rom. 14. 11. Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess to God confession under the Gospel is made aequivalent with an oath under the Law And because the Bish. mentions the third Commandment in proof of the morality and perpetuity of all that Swearing that was commanded under the Law without annulling any tittle of it as if he judg'd every Letter and Tittle of the ten Commandments were moral and so in all respects unchangeable and uncapable of any unihilation by Christ's coming He much forgetâ—… himself in that vain imagiuation for all things in those ten words in the first Table of them are not so moral or perpetual without some cerâ—…nrality and subjection to alteration by Christ's coming as he imagiâ—… and if he had but remembred the very fourth commandment that is next to it he would have remembred that Remember to keep holy the Sabbath-day which then was the very seventh day of the week which God had sanctified was but a sign type shadow figure and ceremony of the seventh day of the Worlds rest from its labour and of keeping after
that are not burden'd with them but onely from our own that are We are pretty well content to part stakes with the Bish. in the Controversie and as he sayes of himself and his sort of Christians viz. As Christians of evil hearts manners full of dissimulation and fraud abounding in iniquity encreasing in persidiousness uncharitableness distrusts jealousies unsatisfactions insecurities As weak and unworthy to be trusted they cannot be without Oaths but Oaths are necessary not absolutely nor morally or preceptively but as a remedy against those Diseases when yet possibly were they Christians truly such they would need no swearing in publike or private So we say of our selves and those true Christians call'd Quakers as Christians truly such in whom is no iniquity guile fraud dissimulation deceit who walk in truth out of strife who can say in truth We are Christians indeed non nomine tantum tenus sed reapse which is security enough in all cases we need no Oaths to be us'd among or impos'd upon us But this being that snare and dilemma that hypocritical Formalists and Christians not truly such but so in Name onely not in Nature fall into that one sin that they are fallen into begets a necessity of another one inconvenience and mischief subjects inavoidably to another as posito uno absurdo sequntur millia Such being yet under the bondage of their own corruptions and lying dead in their trespasses and sins pull thereby upon themselves a number of cumbersome remedies which are oft as bad as the diseases but at best needless if the diseases were not And thus God's Law is added as a lash to the lawless liver or transgressor and as a School-Master to bring to Christ the life and to his life who is the Truth it self And such Christians living in all dishonesty â—…righteousness â—…ying falseness theft cozening cheating enmity hatred malice envy and strife the heavy yoke bondage and charge of mans Laws and Lawyers hireling Priests and covetous Preachers are put upon them to keep them in peace and honesty â—…ill they come to know and â—…e led by that Light of him in themselves who onely guides their feet in the way of Truth and true peace which they yet yet know not there we say with the Bish. Oaths as de facto they are so de jure might be used at least if credit could be given any more than to lyars to such Christians solemn swearing for posita causa ponitur effectus And so if the Church of England be not a Church of Christians truly such as the Bish. seems to intimate by his own words it is not we have the less to say to them as concerning their swearing they have a liberty for us and they would have so much the less to answer for in the day when God takes a final account of them if they would let us have the same liberty from them to decline it rather than force men to sin against their Consciences to swear as they do and as much as they will and that not onely solemnly but prophanely since none of their own Laws against that can reclaim nor restrain them from it for while men are yet the servants of sin as Christians not truly such are as much if not more then Heathens so called they are free from that righteousness that Christ requires of his which is that of the Gospel which far exceeds that of the Law and all legal chief Priests Scribes and Pharisees But such Christians as are by Christ made free from sin as the Quakers are though once as well as others under the power and dominion of it these are bound as servants to that perfect righteousness of the Gospel which as that of the Law to the natural deceitful contentious Iew was forswear not but perform thy Oaths to God if thou make Oaths to end strife and controversies is to the true spiritual Iew or Israelite in whose heart is no guile even to Christs Disciples neither go to law one with another nor swear at all And if England ever come to be a Church constituted of such Christians as are truly such as the primitive Christians were and as the Quakers are who by the Light are led out of strife into the love that casts out all feaâ—…s and jealousies and workâ—… no ill to the Neighbour we shall expect as God does another matter and other fruits than that of swearing and forcing each other to swear on pain of Ruine and we shall not need to clear our selves of that which they call our crime of not swearing for the Light of Christ will lead all that follow it into the same and so as posita causa ponitur so sublata causa tolliâ—…r effectus Sin and Deceit standing Oaths stand though to little purpose where solemn swearers being prophane swearers also are no more to be believed than Lyars but where sin deceit and strife cease there swearing hath no use nor place and so the Bish. doth confess while he says p. 23. The Eutopian desire and aim of these Quakers is not to be found fault with if it were feisable And feisable we say it is if perfection so far as to freedom from sin deceit hatred malice and strife is attainable And that that is attainable in the body even in this very humane nature if the Light of Christ which is that of the Gospel be attended to what need we prove it against our Adversaries in that point when the Bishop confessâ—…s it to our hands And that he so does let him take his own words at large as they lye p. 27 28. where speaking of the design of Christs Sermon Matth. 5. and how the righteousness he calls to must exceed that of Scribes and Pharisees He says Our Saviour gives many singular Lessons or Precepts of more eminent diligence patience charity mortification self-denial sincerity conspicuity perseverance and perfection of obedience required now under the Gospel above mark what either the Letter of the Mosaical Law seemed to exact or by the Pharisaical interpretations nere taught to the Jews and however by Divine Indulgence and connivance or by the hardness and uncharitableness of their own hearts and the customary depravedness of times and manners they might seem to have some temporary dispensation heretofore granted to them or at least to take it to themselves yet now under the Evangelical strictness to which Christ came to restore or raise the Church they might not fancy to themselves any such liberty but were to keep themselves in thought look desire word and deed to that sanctity and severity that was required by the Law and most conform to the holy Will Attributes and Nature of that God whom they ought to imitate as their heavenly Father in all sacred perfections which humane Nature assisted by the Light of the Gospel the Grace of Gods Spirit and the visible example of Christ was capable to attain at least sincerely to aim at and endeavour Which whoever doth
exclusive of all Oaths and then surely of Oaths by the Name of God as wel as ought else on pain of condemnation Swear not by Heaven Earth c. nor any other Oath but let your yea be yea your nay nay lest ye fall into condemnation 5. And because the Bish. sayes it 's agreed on all all hands that both places are a strict prohibition against the sin of Swearing but not against such swearing as is no sin taking it for granted before it be given him by us that there is now as under the Law there was some swearing which is no sin but an act of duty according to which conceit of his he states p. 20. a threefold Question about the interpretation scope and meaning of the two Texts 1. Whether all swearing be utterly forbidden because it is and ever was in its nature a sin against Morality Or 2. Whether all Swearing is therefore now a sin because thus forbidden by a positive Law of Christ under the Gospel 〈◊〉 3. Whether onely some sort of Swearing which is a sin is forbidden but not such swearing as is no sin but an act of veneration To all this we reply 1. That howbeit we affirm net all swearing is forbidden because it is and ever was in its nature a sin against Morality for swearing that now is sin was one of those Ceremoâ—…ialities of the Law which in their nature were not sin but duty for the time then being being as all legal rites were subservient to but not against the morality of the Gospel for the shadows were not against the substance nor the Ceremonials against the Morals and Fiducials nor of them so as to be de esse to them as Paul sayes the Law is not of Faith yet not against it For as Ministerial as the Law was to the Gospel then yet the Gospel may be and now is without it Yet 2dly We own not any swearing to be now a duty or act of Iustice as some swearing once was under the Law but affirm all swearing to be now a sin upon the second account viz. because thus forbidden by a positive Law of Christ under the Gospel who by his death ended the Iuâ—… or Right of that and many more Legal Rites and Rudiments so that however they may de facto be continued not more without the guilt and sin at least of superstition then pompous High-Priests Sacrificings and Circumcisings New Moons days meats drinks and other holinesses of the Law which though accessiry to the Gospel yet so little pertinent to it that whoso pleads the necessary practice and performance of them now among Christ's Disciples made Christ of so little effect to himself as that he shall profit them nothing So then even that sort of swearing which was not sin simpliciter and ex suâ natura in its nature under the Law as a thing against the Morality of the Gospel is now a sin upon the account of his universal prohibition of all swearing who was of Authority to put an end as he did also by his death unto the Law And as some things are prohibita quiâ—… mala as they speak forbidden because they are sin and evil in their very nature as envy hatred deceit injury unrighteousness being all not onely not of the Gospel Grace and Truth that came by Christ but eternally against the morality of it so some things are mala quia prohibita sin and evil because they are forbidden and of this sort are these ceremonies circumcisings sacrifices swearings and other Ordinances of the Law once commanded by Moses since ended and forbidden under Christ of an indifferent nature in themselves having so much good in them that they have no evil and so much evil that they 〈◊〉 no good but meerly according as they are respectively commanded by the Servant or prohibited by the Son in their respective Houses Now against that universal acceptation of the Texts as a general prohibition of all swearing seeing no exception can be found in all the Scripture the Bish. puts in three things by way of exception He presumes p. 36. those after-evidences in the Gospel as he calls them of Christ's verily verily and Paul's calling God to witness do sufficiently clear the limited meaning of our Saviour But his presumption in that particular to be vain is sufficiently proved â—…bove He urges also against the said universal acceptation by way of â—…xception the moral nature end and use of an Oath which saith he p. 36 God hath instituted without any repeal by Christ or his Apostles In disproof of which morality of the nature of an Oath we have said enough before as also how whatever Oaths God instituted of old by Moses the Servant who de novo gave out and so was said to gâ—…ve or institute sundry things that were before him and nâ—…t of him but of the Fathers as Circumcision 1 John 19. 22. Sabbath Sacrifice as well as Swearing those he ended in his Son and hath repealed both by him Matth. 5. and his Apostle Jam. 5. which Texts whether they be Repeals or not sub judice lis est is the main point in Question in evidence of which that they are we have said so much already for our Yea in confutation of what the Bish. hath brought for his Nay But whereas he urges by way of exception against the universal sence of the prohibition the occasion scope and end of Christ's and the Apostles words to which his own instance by way of explication of his meaning do best direct us as to what he forbids and enjoins We say those matters rightly weighed do all plead the Cause of the Quakers more than the Bishops and that is evidently manifest by sundry passages wherein the Bish. in his examination of the said matters most manifestly manages his own business against himself In order to the opening of the true occasion of Christ's words the Bish. siyes thus of the whole Sermon of which these words swear not at all c. are a part viz. Bish. Our Saviour gives many singular Precepts of more eminent diligence patience charity mortification self-denial sincerity conspicuity perseverance and perfection of obedience required now under the Gospel above what either the Letter of the Mosaick Law seem'd to exact or by the Pharisaical interpretations theâ—…ws â—…ws c. And p. 27 28. However by Divine indulgence and connivance they might seem to have some temporary Dispensation heretofore granted them yet now under the Evangelical strictness to which Christ came to restore or raise the Church they might not fancy to themselves any such liberty but were to keep themselves in thought look desire word and deed mark not onely to that sanctity and severity which was required by the Law but also most conform to the holy Will Attributes and Nature of God whom they ought to imitate as their heavenly Father in all sacred perfections which humane nature assisted by the light of the Gospel the grace of God's Spirit